Universal Access To All Knowledge
Home Donate | Store | Blog | FAQ | Jobs | Volunteer Positions | Contact | Bios | Forums | Projects | Terms, Privacy, & Copyright
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: Hg80 Date: Nov 11, 2011 2:45pm
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: Ten selections

Then I suppose that Rene Clair's "The Crazy Ray" [ http://www.archive.org/details/TheCrazyRay ] should be removed. I do not recall the original being tinted and the music bed is certainly not original. So, the individual[s] responsible could lay copyright claim and the film's removed.

I'm getting a headache over this. :)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: billbarstad Date: Nov 11, 2011 2:51pm
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: Ten selections

Your right about the movie. Copyright has made it feel like screaming and shouting and pulling my hair out.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Hg80 Date: Nov 11, 2011 4:45pm
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: Ten selections

I think the following illustrates the interest people have in these vintage films and could probably care less about copyright/public domain. Sometimes common sense philosophy should prevail. After all, what is the base line for the copyright of film: To ensure intellectual/creativity or to line pockets with cash? Would the downloaders spend money per view or a subscription fee to watch the films? Maybe the Internet has lost the original vision of the exchange of knowledge and become an arena of commerce.

"Cabiria"...Downloaded 241 times

"The Conquering Power"...Downloaded 306 times

"Tol'able David"...Downloaded 298 times

As a footnote...I would be disappointed to see "The Crazy Ray" eliminated from the Archive's repertoire...I use it as a teaching reference.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: billbarstad Date: Nov 11, 2011 5:03pm
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: Ten selections

Common sense doesn't have much to do with whether a film should or shouldn't be under copyright. All we have is the law. I love silent movies. I know many other regular visitors to IA do to. I've uploaded 12 silent features and 43 silent shorts. All are PD. I've had to file counterclaims to reverse false takedown demands by StudioCanal on 4 or 5 of the features. That's one reason to know some copyright law.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Hg80 Date: Nov 11, 2011 5:28pm
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: Ten selections

Common sense in that copyrights should not extend beyond the creator's life span to infinity. The function of a copyright extends to the propriety of prime source ownership [those intellectual/creative rights] and revenue generated during that individual's life time. I doubt that Rene Clair's heirs have received a franc from "The Crazy Ray" lately. If one had the time and authority, I bet half of the feature films at the Internet Archive would have to be removed for some violation of a copyright restriction...however minor. Face it, it's not "really" about intellectual property rights; it's about money.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: billbarstad Date: Nov 11, 2011 5:38pm
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: Ten selections

Yep.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Phil_ Date: Nov 11, 2011 8:24pm
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: Ten selections

Thought for Today:

Copyright laws do not seem to reward the people who deserve a reward, but maintain an inhibitory environment for those who could benefit most from a truly free society. That being said, I know a few artists (including some actors in film and television) who are unwittingly 'victims' of copyright infringement. For example, I know that as I watch one of my (actor) friend's shows (currently in syndication on cable television), she has no idea that there are a hundred p2p-heads (for lack of an appropriate word) online circulating a rip of her studio's DVD compilation, on Usenet or some unnamed p2p network.

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)